Dear America-hating free traitors: do you think this trade deficit can go on forever?

[LJ_Reloaded]

If you believe that, then you know very little about currency markets or the bond markets.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/stevesc...bble-watchers-are-looking-to-the-bond-market/

It all started with tulips, then came corn and technology stocks, before the phenomenon ran through property and cheap money. I am of course talking about bubbles. Not the type children play with and people write songs about, but the kind that when they burst, usually cause financial havoc.

These days focus is squarely on the bond market as the flashpoint where a bubble could burst. Junk bonds, investment grade corporates and even U.S. Treasuries – the classic “no risk” investment option — all seem to be reaching new heights and drawing suspicion.

This is being caused by the massive trade deficits America is running.

If the bond bubble bursts - and, mathematically speaking, it absolutely must - imports will stop, because they simply will become too expensive.

What will happen to your foreign outsourcing utopia then? Can you answer that? You can, if you understand basic economics...

 

[LJ_Reloaded]

Well, do you think it can go on forever?

 

[Squibbs]

You sure as hell do...

Lighten the sig, dork.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Sophisms of the Protectionists
Frédéric Bastiat

Free download at many, many sites on the net...

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

http://forum.literotica.com/showthread.php?t=858208

 

[Sean Renaud]

Forever? No. Long enough to function as forever from any of our perspectives? Most likely.

 

[Adre]

If it is like most things, it cannot go on forever. But instead of using it as a debate topic with the 'economic experts' around here, I've used it as a moneymaking opportunity for the last few years.

 

[LJ_Reloaded]

Forever? No. Long enough to function as forever from any of our perspectives? Most likely.

Not even close. The system is likely to collapse within the next 20 years.

 

[Sean Renaud]

While I doubt your right, 20 years will have you retired if nothing goes wrong, and me well on my way out assuming we don't massively change the retirement age amongst other things.

And that's based on the unlikely possibility that you're correct on this and there is no particular reason why the system needs to collapse in the forseeable future. We have plenty of ways to dodge the bullet both long term and short term.

 

[LJ_Reloaded]

While I doubt your right, 20 years will have you retired if nothing goes wrong, and me well on my way out assuming we don't massively change the retirement age amongst other things.

Too bad for the next generation, huh?

And that's based on the unlikely possibility that you're correct on this and there is no particular reason why the system needs to collapse in the forseeable future. We have plenty of ways to dodge the bullet both long term and short term.

In 20 years the US won't even be able to service the INTEREST on the debt. Our back to back pattern of jobless recoveries and economic crises are coming faster and faster, with unemployment getting worse each time.

The college debt bubble is about to explode and that alone is going to be a multi trillion dollar mess. You have to be crazy to deny that is coming, soon. When it does, the entire higher education system will collapse. That's called the endgame.

Then there's the bond bubble.

There IS no scenario that sees the US avoiding a catastrophic 1929 style collapse for more than 20 years.

 

[Sean Renaud]

Too bad for the next generation, huh?

Hopefully not but that is a possibility if we don't get our shit together.

In 20 years the US won't even be able to service the INTEREST on the debt. Our back to back pattern of jobless recoveries and economic crises are coming faster and faster, with unemployment getting worse each time.

Under Clinton we ran a surplus, we can get this under control without even getting particularly radical as far as tax increases and cost cutting. We don't do it due to a combination of lack of political will and short sighteness. Not because we can't, because we DON'T.

The college debt bubble is about to explode and that alone is going to be a multi trillion dollar mess. You have to be crazy to deny that is coming, soon. When it does, the entire higher education system will collapse. That's called the endgame.

You might end up being right about this one, I'm highly skeptical about the college debt bubble though. I'll admit, I simply don't believe this one based on the facts that have been presented. I think this ranks right up there with something out of Tom Clancy.

Then there's the bond bubble.

There IS no scenario that sees the US avoiding a catastrophic 1929 style collapse for more than 20 years.

Raise taxes, get the deficit under control. Don't worry so much about jobs, it's frankly a side effect not the problem(s). If we're talking about America as a whole the problem is simply a lack of tax revenue if you're problem is employment (which frankly is a stupid problem to have) that's a bit harder to solve. The reality is that the world doesn't require as many people to function as it once did and it never will again. That's not really an American problem though, that's a global problem.

 

[LJ_Reloaded]

Under Clinton we ran a surplus, we can get this under control without even getting particularly radical as far as tax increases and cost cutting. We don't do it due to a combination of lack of political will and short sighteness. Not because we can't, because we DON'T.

We had a tech boom during the Clinton years. Lots of damned good paying middle class jobs were created then.

Then American corporations went and outsourced that.

Exactly what new job boom do you see coming? I've been asking this on Lit for 10 years and the only person to even try to answer it was Islandman when he claimed alternative energy was the next big thing. I told him it wasn't, he and moonlust raged at me, and then American companies promptly outsourced THAT to China. Islandman now ducks and hides whenever I bring up his failed prediction. Moonlust? Probably starved to death by now. We haven't had a job boom since then, by the way.

You might end up being right about this one, I'm highly skeptical about the college debt bubble though. I'll admit, I simply don't believe this one based on the facts that have been presented. I think this ranks right up there with something out of Tom Clancy.

Then who's going to cover all those loan defaults? The job situation for college grads isn't looking better, what with the new jobs all being low paying crap. You also aren't looking at how this will affect colleges when those bad loans finally explode. A collapse in the number of students will occur concurrently.

Raise taxes, get the deficit under control. Don't worry so much about jobs, it's frankly a side effect not the problem(s).

Wait, you think that tons of unemployed and low-wage workers are not the primary problem? That's a big part of your tax base right there. These are the hungry people that are going to start rioting if things get worse. Obviously you haven't seen what's going on in Europe or the Middle East. Countries that say massive unemployment isn't the problem, tend to get burnt down.

If we're talking about America as a whole the problem is simply a lack of tax revenue if you're problem is employment (which frankly is a stupid problem to have) that's a bit harder to solve. The reality is that the world doesn't require as many people to function as it once did and it never will again. That's not really an American problem though, that's a global problem.

That's a good way to spark a GLOBAL revolution.

Which is good by me, the first people to die in that scenario are the ones who think "the world doesn't require as many people to function".

 

[renard_ruse]

Both major parties have sold out our country's workers with devastating "free" trade treaties over the past 30 years.

"Free" trade isn't free!

 

[Sean Renaud]

We had a tech boom during the Clinton years. Lots of damned good paying middle class jobs were created then.

We were eliminating the debt every year until Reagan took over. We weren't having seperate booms each decade were we? They aren't necessary. The middle class is (to some extent) but you don't need the boom, you want the boom.

Then American corporations went and outsourced that.

Exactly what new job boom do you see coming? I've been asking this on Lit for 10 years and the only person to even try to answer it was Islandman when he claimed alternative energy was the next big thing. I told him it wasn't, he and moonlust raged at me, and then American companies promptly outsourced THAT to China. Islandman now ducks and hides whenever I bring up his failed prediction. Moonlust? Probably starved to death by now. We haven't had a job boom since then, by the way.

Honestly? I don't predict any major boom (not that I think anybody reliably does in the real world) if there was going to be one it would probably be some kind of entertainment boom or streamlining of some sort.

Then who's going to cover all those loan defaults? The job situation for college grads isn't looking better, what with the new jobs all being low paying crap. You also aren't looking at how this will affect colleges when those bad loans finally explode. A collapse in the number of students will occur concurrently.

I already ceded that I simply don't believe this one. I'm the first person to admit when something is more a gut feeling than something I can back with facts. If you turn out to be correct it'll be interesting to see how it all plays out.

Wait, you think that tons of unemployed and low-wage workers are not the primary problem? That's a big part of your tax base right there. These are the hungry people that are going to start rioting if things get worse. Obviously you haven't seen what's going on in Europe or the Middle East. Countries that say massive unemployment isn't the problem, tend to get burnt down.

No, they aren't the primary problem. They are a symptom of the problem. I've seen what's going on in Europe and the Middle East, they are pissed. They are pissed because they are cold and hungry and bored. Feed em, cloth em, entertain them/keep em busy. It's not complicated.

Also the Middle East has been stuck in pretty much one endless riot for the last few years.

That's a good way to spark a GLOBAL revolution.

Which is good by me, the first people to die in that scenario are the ones who think "the world doesn't require as many people to function".

A global revolution won't change the fact that the world doesn't require as many people to function as it once did. Bitch, moan, cry, riot. See if it changes the world. Nothing shy of a Luddite revolution is going to change the fact that the world is simply more efficient now than it was even ten years ago. I'm unclear on WHY this is a bad thing though. It's not like most inventors or innovators did so why they were working 24/7. What exactly is wrong with perhaps a 35 hour work week? Or some other solution that fixes the actual problem, which is a combination of wealth and income distribution?

Either way no realistic global revolution is going to kill the internet and make the mailman relevant, or the cell phone and make the secretary relevant. I could probably come up with several dozen other jobs (cashiers and drivers amongst them) that are going to be obsolete in the next two decades if not sooner. So THAT plan is out.

 

[renard_ruse]

We must restore good paying factory jobs, or America is DOOMED.

 

[Sean Renaud]

If you're right Renard, America is doomed in short order and the world isn't far behind us. We've already got a lot of stuff handled by machines, what do you predict happens when those nifty 3d printers stop being a curiosity and start becoming run of the mill? Last I checked they are good enough to make working guns (granted they don't last long). Where do you see them in ten to fifteen years? Especially when coupled with driverless cars and casheirless stores, ebooks, steam and netflix?

If your right, we're fucked and there is close to nothing anybody can do about it.

 

[dougsan]

Who would argue in hoesty that they believed the current trade deficit could continue for 20 years? Folks, run the numbers, it can't last ten years. The USA will come back for a short period on the back of military hardware, agriculture exports, etc. When things are back in a balance of sorts, the tables will turn again. This, I call global economics in the era of global enterprise. Nothing will happen to hurt the conglomerits. IMO

 

[Sean Renaud]

It's lasted that long already.

 

[LJ_Reloaded]

We were eliminating the debt every year until Reagan took over. We weren't having seperate booms each decade were we? They aren't necessary. The middle class is (to some extent) but you don't need the boom, you want the boom.

The manufacturing job bonanza was the reason behind the great prosperity that held up the middle class from the end of WW-II to the late 1970s.

Then we revved up foreign outsourcing. Funny, how things went awry after that: the debt skyrocketed and the middle class went into decline.

No, they aren't the primary problem. They are a symptom of the problem. I've seen what's going on in Europe and the Middle East, they are pissed. They are pissed because they are cold and hungry and bored. Feed em, cloth em, entertain them/keep em busy. It's not complicated.

A symptom of what? What is more basic than a lack of jobs?

Also the Middle East has been stuck in pretty much one endless riot for the last few years.

A global revolution won't change the fact that the world doesn't require as many people to function as it once did. Bitch, moan, cry, riot. See if it changes the world. Nothing shy of a Luddite revolution is going to change the fact that the world is simply more efficient now than it was even ten years ago. I'm unclear on WHY this is a bad thing though.

You'll become clear on the issue when the water line reaches your porch. A population decline automatically means a decline in the number of customers. The entire economy is based on the fractional reserve banking system, which depends on an endless supply of new players. If the world doesn't need as many people, then a global population contraction is inevitable. Such a contraction means that the fractional reserve system collapses - the whole economic system, period. The fractional reserve Ponzi scheme is exactly that much of a fundamental element of modern society.

Plus you're talking about the mass starvation of millions. When you see that as not being a problem, you've utterly lost the plot of the human story here.

It's not like most inventors or innovators did so why they were working 24/7. What exactly is wrong with perhaps a 35 hour work week? Or some other solution that fixes the actual problem, which is a combination of wealth and income distribution?

Because the more foolish ones with the wealth - the multibillionaires in particular - will keep moving their money around to avoid proper distribution, until the populace rebels and kills them for doing so. You want to know why there are a handful of rich people out there who say "raise taxes on the rich"? It's because they know this. They also saw or foresaw what's going on in Europe and the Middle East and don't want to see that going on worldwide.

Either way no realistic global revolution is going to kill the internet and make the mailman relevant, or the cell phone and make the secretary relevant.

If society cannot find jobs for the populace then it must resign itself to endless cycles of unrest, which will inevitably overwhelm society's capacity to quell it. Or it will leave the country too weak to survive an outside attack.

You do not quell unrest with the dole; this system eventually goes bad. It must go bad, because with so many people out of work you can't generate the money to pay for it, what with the rich being so stingy. You must support it with middle class jobs. There is no other way, long-term.

Thus, all societies ultimately face one final decision: good paying jobs for the masses, or collapse and societal annihilation. Employment for all or another dark age. The Ottoman Turks weren't what ended the Byzantine Empire at Constantinople - it was the throngs of poor. The Ottomans merely cracked the hollow eggshell.

Another dark age will most CERTAINLY kill the infrastructure and the modern technology that depends on it. You'll lose economies of scale, plus the manpower, access to resources, and sheer willpower, to maintain it.

You don't want that. You want good paying jobs. You ain't gonna get that with foreign outsourcing.

 

[LJ_Reloaded]

If you're right Renard, America is doomed in short order and the world isn't far behind us. We've already got a lot of stuff handled by machines, what do you predict happens when those nifty 3d printers stop being a curiosity and start becoming run of the mill? Last I checked they are good enough to make working guns (granted they don't last long). Where do you see them in ten to fifteen years? Especially when coupled with driverless cars and casheirless stores, ebooks, steam and netflix?

If your right, we're fucked and there is close to nothing anybody can do about it.

Ah, the 3d printing machine miracle fairy.

There's one small problem with that, Sean... 3d Printers need raw materials to build with. Where are you going to get the silicon, iron, plastic, and rare earth minerals?

You're going to get them from the one group of people who will emerge as the sole owners of wealth in the world in the future you're describing: mine owners.

 

[Sean Renaud]

The manufacturing job bonanza was the reason behind the great prosperity that held up the middle class from the end of WW-II to the late 1970s.

Except for the Great Depression (which seems to have been caused in no small part by an accumulation of wealth at the top) it seems we've had pretty good prosperity historically.

Then we revved up foreign outsourcing. Funny, how things went awry after that: the debt skyrocketed and the middle class went into decline.

It could also be the dramatic lowering of taxes and the drop in investment in the states that came along with it.

A symptom of what? What is more basic than a lack of jobs?

Proper distribution of wealth and income. As your quite fond of pointing out unemployment is going down as people are taking shit jobs. If the problem was jobs primarily then that wouldn't really be a problem.

Also the Middle East has been stuck in pretty much one endless riot for the last few years.

Yep. And regardless of what people claim it's not because they finally got fed up with Islam or wanted women driving cars. It doesn't have much to do with their leaders being bastards. They are hungry, uncomfortable, bored and pissed.

You'll become clear on the issue when the water line reaches your porch. A population decline automatically means a decline in the number of customers. The entire economy is based on the fractional reserve banking system, which depends on an endless supply of new players. If the world doesn't need as many people, then a global population contraction is inevitable. Such a contraction means that the fractional reserve system collapses - the whole economic system, period. The fractional reserve Ponzi scheme is exactly that much of a fundamental element of modern society.

First, the fractional reserve banking system doesn't actually need an endless supply of new players. If I happen to be wrong sadly it doesn't really matter because there ain't shit we can do about it. The population will eventually peak and then decline. Hell most western nations have already peaked. China is in decline (granted they brought this on themselves, but it's likely if their culture wasn't what it is they would have peaked just like everybody else even without a law).

Besides we've been on some version of the fractal reserve since what? The Middle Ages?

Plus you're talking about the mass starvation of millions. When you see that as not being a problem, you've utterly lost the plot of the human story here.

No part of my plan involves the starvation of ANYBODY. For any reason whatsoever. That's actually part of the point.

Because the more foolish ones with the wealth - the multibillionaires in particular - will keep moving their money around to avoid proper distribution, until the populace rebels and kills them for doing so. You want to know why there are a handful of rich people out there who say "raise taxes on the rich"? It's because they know this. They also saw or foresaw what's going on in Europe and the Middle East and don't want to see that going on worldwide.

The populace will take a long time to rebel, especially in the states. That said what's happening in the Middle East is because they are cold and hungry. What's happening in Europe is because they believe in equality. What's happening in America is because we believe you keep what you kill. For the record I'm in agreement with you on this point and have no clue why you brought it up. Things in the states would have to get much worse for us to start moving in that direction. Even the liberals in this country don't really support unions or UHC or higher taxes. Redistribution is a dirty word in this country.

Normally you'd be all for finding ways to make it harder/impossible for multi-billionaires to play that game. Is it simply impossible to stop them and thus we shouldn't even try?

If society cannot find jobs for the populace then it must resign itself to endless cycles of unrest, which will inevitably overwhelm society's capacity to quell it. Or it will leave the country too weak to survive an outside attack.

Job is a poorly defined word in this case though. I mean unless you're going to throw your lot in with Vette and claim that the guy researching snail mating habits doesn't have a job because he's not actively creating something. There is no reason why this result is necessary.

You do not quell unrest with the dole; this system eventually goes bad. It must go bad, because with so many people out of work you can't generate the money to pay for it, what with the rich being so stingy. You must support it with middle class jobs. There is no other way, long-term.

You seem keen on knocking the rich down a bit every time except when it serves your purposes for them to suddenly become all powerful and untouchable. Interesting. The "dole" as you're fond of pointing out results in roads, schools, electricity, internet conections, police, fire fighters, sewer systems and trash collectors. You think it should cover health care as well. How is this not the "dole" or does it not become the dole until it includes some form of food and shelter?

Thus, all societies ultimately face one final decision: good paying jobs for the masses, or collapse and societal annihilation. Employment for all or another dark age. The Ottoman Turks weren't what ended the Byzantine Empire at Constantinople - it was the throngs of poor. The Ottomans merely cracked the hollow eggshell.[/QUOTE]

Negatory. Prior to the industrial revolution no such decision needed to be made and not enough time has passed since then to make any statements about what all societies do or don't do.

Another dark age will most CERTAINLY kill the infrastructure and the modern technology that depends on it. You'll lose economies of scale, plus the manpower, access to resources, and sheer willpower, to maintain it.

Yeah. Right. Nothing shy of pissed off aliens is destroying the infrastructure of the modern world. It simply isn't possible. If for no other reason than most of it is easy enough to rebuild.

You don't want that. You want good paying jobs. You ain't gonna get that with foreign outsourcing.

No, we aren't. That's hardly the point though.

Ah, the 3d printing machine miracle fairy.

There's one small problem with that, Sean... 3d Printers need raw materials to build with. Where are you going to get the silicon, iron, plastic, and rare earth minerals?

You're going to get them from the one group of people who will emerge as the sole owners of wealth in the world in the future you're describing: mine owners.

Oh no. Rich people. I'm. . .oh wait. I don't have anything in particular against the rich. More to the point they need raw materials but I've been told there is some kind of crazy process where you can take old stuff, break it down and make it into new stuff. I'm not sure what the process is called though.

 

[LJ_Reloaded]

Except for the Great Depression (which seems to have been caused in no small part by an accumulation of wealth at the top) it seems we've had pretty good prosperity historically.

Pretty good prosperity that has been reduced by a return to the concentration of wealth at the top - which has been caused largely by foreign outsourcing.

It could also be the dramatic lowering of taxes and the drop in investment in the states that came along with it.

Foreign outsourcing eliminates middle-class jobs, creates a handful of high paying jobs and a huge number of low-paying work. As a result it reduces the amount of money that workers have to spend - which means there's less economic activity, which means less tax revenue. Funny, how that is exactly what is happening: the pie is shrinking for the working class.

Whether you raise or lower taxes on the rich in that scenario, what you still have is a Plutonomy - an economy dependent largely upon the rich.

Proper distribution of wealth and income. As your quite fond of pointing out unemployment is going down as people are taking shit jobs. If the problem was jobs primarily then that wouldn't really be a problem.

This situation was created by high unemployment. Employers are offering shit for wages. Without exception, wages go down in an employer's market, and wages go up in an employee's market. A proliferation of shit jobs means there's not enough to go around. Case in point: look at how many job openings we have versus job seekers. Run the numbers. It's a jobs problem.

Yep. And regardless of what people claim it's not because they finally got fed up with Islam or wanted women driving cars. It doesn't have much to do with their leaders being bastards. They are hungry, uncomfortable, bored and pissed.

And the same is going to happen to America.

First, the fractional reserve banking system doesn't actually need an endless supply of new players.

You've got to be kidding me, you don't understand how the system works.

It works by finding new people to make loans to. It's how every bank finds a way to make an additional X percent interest off of the $100 you deposit: they loan the money to someone else. Then that person pays the money back with interest, and that person finds some other source of money so they can pay it back. When the population declines, someone, or perhaps almost everyone in that chain, runs out of new sources of money or borrowers. The dog catches up with the rabbit. Nom. Game over.

If I happen to be wrong sadly it doesn't really matter because there ain't shit we can do about it. The population will eventually peak and then decline. Hell most western nations have already peaked. China is in decline (granted they brought this on themselves, but it's likely if their culture wasn't what it is they would have peaked just like everybody else even without a law).

Besides we've been on some version of the fractal reserve since what? The Middle Ages?

Yup.

The populace will take a long time to rebel, especially in the states. That said what's happening in the Middle East is because they are cold and hungry. What's happening in Europe is because they believe in equality. What's happening in America is because we believe you keep what you kill. For the record I'm in agreement with you on this point and have no clue why you brought it up. Things in the states would have to get much worse for us to start moving in that direction. Even the liberals in this country don't really support unions or UHC or higher taxes. Redistribution is a dirty word in this country.

The problem with liberals is that many of them lack balls. They don't believe in punching someone in the face for racial slurs, for fuck's sake. You send a couple of cops with truncheons to beat down a liberal protest and the liberals run home crying. Except the union guys. They know how to rumble - and the liberals cry and wring their wrists when they do.

Many liberals are fucking cowards. But when the shit hits the fan there are enough of us who'll fight back. We just gotta accept that some of our brethren must be left to the wolves, it's better than putting up with their "please don't be violent!!!" bickering.

Normally you'd be all for finding ways to make it harder/impossible for multi-billionaires to play that game. Is it simply impossible to stop them and thus we shouldn't even try?

At this point the only way out is a total collapse - one which makes life unsafe even for the multi-billionaires, one in which their money has little or no value.

A stable society clearly, overwhelmingly benefits them.

Job is a poorly defined word in this case though. I mean unless you're going to throw your lot in with Vette and claim that the guy researching snail mating habits doesn't have a job because he's not actively creating something. There is no reason why this result is necessary.

He is creating knowledge. The problem is that we're letting research jobs of all sorts, go right to China and India. The argument of America transitioning into a knowledge based economy is bullshit - because we're shipping those jobs out, too. Anyone in the world can learn the theory general relativity and if they're in Angola offering to research FTL for $1 a day then the schmuck over at MIT getting his MIT degree is out of a job if he wants to do the research for even $5 a day.

You seem keen on knocking the rich down a bit every time except when it serves your purposes for them to suddenly become all powerful and untouchable.

You seriously need to read for comprehension. The rich in America have the advantage of a spineless populace that is easily cowed and indoctrinated. That is what makes them untouchable here. The only way out here is a total collapse.

In the Middle East the people are exactly what the Tea Party wish they were like.

Interesting. The "dole" as you're fond of pointing out results in roads, schools, electricity, internet conections, police, fire fighters, sewer systems and trash collectors. You think it should cover health care as well. How is this not the "dole" or does it not become the dole until it includes some form of food and shelter?

Dole, social safety net, government services, it really doesn't matter what you call it. Without good paying jobs for the masses, you cannot have healthy consumer spending or incomes to tax. Without that you cannot fund roads, schools, electricity, internet conections, police, fire fighters, sewer systems, health care, and trash collectors.

Negatory. Prior to the industrial revolution no such decision needed to be made

But that is exactly what happened to the Roman and Byzantine empires. They were undone by poverty. The Visigoths and the Ottomans were simply opportunistic invaders who read the already dead civilizations their epitaph.

Plenty of civilizations have been undone by the rise of wealth inequality. The Anasazi, the Mayans, Norse Greenland, and others. The common problem: the rich stopped caring about the world around them, and bled everything dry to support their own exclusive lifestyle.

Yeah. Right. Nothing shy of pissed off aliens is destroying the infrastructure of the modern world. It simply isn't possible. If for no other reason than most of it is easy enough to rebuild.

You haven't seen Detroit, have you? Or plenty of Southern cities. Our roads are crumbling all over the country as we speak. Our electrical infrastructure is deteriorating. Our infrastructure can simply decay, and it already is. Neglect can do as much damage as any aliens.

No, we aren't. That's hardly the point though.

It's the point of this thread.

Oh no. Rich people. I'm. . .oh wait. I don't have anything in particular against the rich. More to the point they need raw materials but I've been told there is some kind of crazy process where you can take old stuff, break it down and make it into new stuff. I'm not sure what the process is called though.

Including the rare earths that we use in consumer electronics?